Didn't Obama Fix Everything?

[Narcotized]

---

Members do not see this ad.

.

 

[ProRealDoc]

You know we are in world of trouble when the richest man in the world is no longer Bill Gates but a dude named Carlos who lives in good ol' Mexico!

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/10/billionaires-2010_Carlos-Slim-Helu-family_WYDJ.html

 

[Narcotized]

http://www.businessinsider.com/henr...or-that-greece-bailout-thats-right-you-2010-5

So, Greece has an average retirement age of 53 with an average pension of 80% salary. To anyone with the most rudimentary of math skills (that would immediately eliminate our President and most all of his economic advisors), the situation is obviously unsustainable.

The Wizards of Washington (a PC term for the *******es that make up our government) have decided we, Americans that are already as broke as Greece or likely more broke, should borrow money from China and give it to Greece as a reward for their gluttony. Somewhere, fat lazy retired Greeks of age 53 living high on the hog are laughing their collective fat Greek asses off at stupid Americans burying themselves further in debt to support Greece's ridiculous lifestyle.

When you see where all of this is going you will have as little interest in the ASA politics as I do. Who cares about piddly anesthesia politics when your "leaders" are doing everything possible to ensure we sink hard as a nation. Where is the outrage? Is the American public ignorant of the situation, stupid, or just plain given up? Oh, everyone just keep living in denial that the debt problems won't explode here.

 

[cfdavid]

.

 

[cfdavid]

Narc,

How do I feel? I feel as if we're spiraling down so many uncharted waters that it seems like there hasn't been a more precarious time in recent (since WWII) history.....

The unsustainability of our financial situation is looming so heavily, that it's only the relativeness of the situation that is perhaps stemming (or delaying) what seems to be the inevitable in the US.

When the Germans and French (to a lesser extent), the two biggest economies in the Euro zone, begin questioning why they're bailing out less productive/efficient/disciplined countries in the Euro zone, then the analogy would be why would the average Texan continue bailing out failed state economies such as California and a growing list of other "failed states" here in the US? So we see, perhaps irresponsible, "chatter" of secession here in the U.S. and this should only increase as fiscal disparities continue to widen, from state to state.

As for our absolute failure to stem the tide of illegal immigration? This is going to further polarize our society. Moderates, especially during times of crisis or severity, will get pushed to the sidelines, and the hard-liners will win popular support in their respective camps. The US government will try hard (from DC as well as through media which have already tried very hard, despite credible evidence to the contrary, that "Tea Partiers" and members of any "Patriot movements" are "RACIST" in nature) to prevent this, which could mean infringements on Civil Liberties, which will possibly only exacerbate the situation. But, when you have city councils in SF and LA suggest boycotting ARIZONA, well, we've clearly reached a new low. Again, another serious threat, and to think that we're NOT Balkanizing (if not yet geographically) is probably incorrect. I think we are, and everything points to this increasing as a major, serious problem.

And when the light begins to shine on the UK, followed by the US, well at that point I feel that anything is possible. War over false pretenses is also one of them. A distractor and short term "stimulus"..... A global "resetting" of debt? I just don't know, but this debt thing is going global, fast....

For investors, many of whom have rightly foregone any faith in our financial markets (1000 point sketchy intraday drops in the Dow for example), one must be extremely nimble and ready to initiate a TOTAL liquidation and into cash or other "hard assets". Gold is continuing to look good, but there's significant evidence that the gold market is manipulated to the downside via central bank selling, which is in their best interest when people are seriously concerned about the value of fiat currency.

Play trends, and get out of any "run ups" very fast. Leave profits on the table. Ride up, but be well aware of, any new bubbles (many have said before, and I myself believe we're at a point where the global "economy" NEEDS one bubble to inflate after another) that may crop up such as new derivatives (carbon credits, Hollywood films etc. if these indeed take off).

And, be very careful from whom you get your information, because just as the Tech Bubble was in full force (peaking), Abbey Joseph Cohen from Goldman Sachs was telling investors what a great deal Amazon.com was even at those PE's (and I promise you this was at a point when they were pitching one thing to "retail investors" while their traders were already initiating shorts on those same securities, much like has recently come to light about their real-estate derivatives)....... Realize that corruption abounds on Wall Street (as if anyone needs any proof of this at this point) and that most major media companies are, in turn, run by mega-corporations which are global in scope and may have serious conflicts of interest.

****To be sure, as POWERFUL countries become threatened with solvency (Greece is one thing, the US quite another), then anything will go. "States" will pull out all stops in order NOT to fail. This could mean creating a catastrophic "global event" which may create a (albeit temporary) "flight back to "safety" such as T-bills etc etc. Again, your guess is as good as mine, but I personally feel it's naive to think that the stops WON'T be pulled out at that point, and it seems we're not TOO far off from that.

Interesting times.....

cf

 

[Jet915]

I'm sorry but the Greeks and the European Union deserve what they get with their high tax socialist welfare system. Unfortunately, they might take us down with them...

 

[cfdavid]

I'm sorry but the Greeks and the European Union deserve what they get with their high tax socialist welfare system. Unfortunately, they might take us down with them...

I beg to differ. We'll have nobody to blame for our own future insolvency but ourselves and our fearless leaders. Our leadership lacks political will for precisely the same reason that the Greeks are rioting. Everyone feels entitled, and too many expect a relatively free ride. But, all "good things" must come to an end.

The dumber and more dependent the American populace, the more they/we'll reward generous programs (and the politicians that legislate them) that only make our demise more certain. It is what it is, I guess.

 

[pgg]

When you see where all of this is going you will have as little interest in the ASA politics as I do. Who cares about piddly anesthesia politics when your "leaders" are doing everything possible to ensure we sink hard as a nation. Where is the outrage?

Well, for those of us who aren't livin' large and pretending that urban paradise isn't just a facade waiting to crack into violent anarchy, the ASA, ASAPAC, and our jobs still matter. If nothing else they're our individual ways to better prepare ourselves for what's coming. At least, for the 3 or 5 or 15 years we have before the recalibration comes, they matter.

We're sinking, but the world is too complex to accurately predict when we'll hit bottom. It may take a long time. In the meantime, it's not unreasonable to put some effort into looking out for #1.

I don't know about you, but a few years or a decade of earning $350K/yr instead of $200K/yr will make a substantial difference in where I'll be when we go through our Argentina or Greece phase.

Is the American public ignorant of the situation,

More denial than ignorance. I'm 35 years old, and for my whole life I've "known" that the national debt was big and getting bigger each year. Everyone who's ever had a checkbook or credit card knows this is unsustainable, but everybody's been watching it happen for decades and yet somehow, it hasn't crushed us yet. It's easy to start thinking that maybe nations can use different math and get away with it.

stupid,

50% of all people are dumber than average, and we all know how dumb the average person is.

or just plain given up?

That, or waiting for someone to figure out a way to weasel our way out of our debts.

 

[Narcotized]

We'll have nobody to blame for our own future insolvency but ourselves and our fearless leaders. Our leadership lacks political will for precisely the same reason that the Greeks are rioting. Everyone feels entitled, and too many expect a relatively free ride.

You hit the nail on the head. I laugh when those in charge blame China currency manipulation for our problems. LMAO!!! Are you friggin kidding me?? This country has turned into one big massive Koolaide overdose. The "Genius" in charge spends us broke, and then his flunkies convince us that our demise will be Greece and China's fault. People, please wake up and get active before it's all over.

 

[Apollyon]

This country has turned into one big massive Koolaide overdose.

It wasn't "Kool-Aid"! It was "Flavor Aid"!

 

[cfdavid]

You hit the nail on the head. I laugh when the dopes in charge blame China currency manipulation for our problems. LMAO!!! Are you friggin kidding me?? This country has turned into one big massive Koolaide overdose. The "Genius" in charge spends us broke, and then his flunkies convince us that our demise will be Greece and China's fault. People, please wake up and get active before it's all over.

Narc, as you well know, we WILL be seeing "austerity" measures in the U.S. in the not so distant future....

Personally, I think the world needs to rise up against central banks in the U.S. (in particular), but even globally.

Looks like the Vitter amendment failed to pass the Senate yesterday:

May 11, 2010


Dear C4L Member,

Below is the press release Campaign for Liberty is sending to all major media outlets in reaction to the Senate defeating Senator David Vitter's Audit the Fed amendment to the Dodd Fed Empowerment Act.

CLICK HERE to see how your senators voted.

If your senators voted yes, thank them for their vote to Audit the Fed and tell them to oppose the Dodd Fed Empowerment Act.

If your senators voted no, tell them their vote puts them on the side of endless bailouts and continuing to allow the Federal Reserve to operate in secret after its reckless policies devastated our economy.


Insist they vote against Dodd's Fed Empowerment Act.

 

[Jet915]

I'm sorry, I should have been clearer, what I meant to say was the current turmoil in Europe will likely bring our markets down as well. I agree, it seems like our government is headed toward a socialist type system.

 

[cfdavid]

I'm sorry, I should have been clearer, what I meant to say was the current turmoil in Europe will likely bring our markets down as well. I agree, it seems like our government is headed toward a socialist type system.

All I can add further is that it'll be very interesting to keep an eye on world economic events in coming months/years.

It's really anybody's guess how things will play out, because I'm in the camp that the "big boys" aren't going to go down without a fight. This means lots of misinformation in order to maintain this faith based (what all fiat currency is essentially) economic system.

It's worth remembering, too, that all things are relative. Right now, the U.S. dollar looks pretty good compared to the Euro, yet the dollar is in serious trouble from most objective points of view.

Because of the relativity of it all, this leaves the door open for "distractions" to be possibly perpetrated, which (as stated previously) could cause global "markets" to rush back to "relative safety". That is, political unrest in key parts of the world, or a major catastrophe in an important economic region of the world could make US debt "attractive" in an environment of increasingly toxic looking US debt.......

So, if the Chinese slow down their purchasing of US debt instruments (which will have a direct impact on our ability to run anything, though the "Fed" will just step in and "print money" electronically in order to buy up failed/unsuccessful Treasury auctions as Peter Schiff describes), then such turns for the worse in other regions of the world would be "good" for the US or any other major economic block (not proximate to any mayhem) that finds itself having difficulties floating debt at lower interest rates.

Times may have changed, but if you look at the Sino-British opium wars, which were economic (and then physical) wars, it suggests that virtually anything is possible when big players find themselves at odds (it started with a huge trade imbalance with Britain importing tons of tea and silk with very little to export back, thus state sanctioned exportation of dope, which had catastrophic effects on their "trading partner"). I also don't think that times have changed as much, morally speaking (if you look objectively at the world), as we'd like to think....... This is why I feel things can really get "interesting".

On the other hand, we could see more benign solutions to what are indeed major problems in the West. But, everything, including those measures, will come with a price.

cf

 

[Narcotized]

Isn't it just so expected the the state with the most Hollywood/Obama types practiced Obamanomics to the largest degree, and, surprise surprise, they ended up just like Greece:

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/schwarzenegger-warns-of-%22terrible-cuts-absolutely-terrible-cuts%22-coming-in-california-483776.html?tickers=tlt,tbt,xlf,ncu,nvx,nkl,cev

These are the options: California, which from first hand experience I can tell you throws one Hell of a riot, will go Greece-like with guns blazing in the streets again, and/or President Sir-Spend-A-Lot will write them blank checks in his unstoppable mission to completely destroy the American Economy into a debt death spiral. And sure as the sun rises in the East, his personal media will praise the "Genius" for avoiding another catastrophe.

Oh fun times indeed.

 

[cfdavid]

Isn't it just so expected the the state with the most Hollywood/Obama types practiced Obamanomics to the largest degree, and, surprise surprise, they ended up just like Greece:

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticke...3776.html?tickers=tlt,tbt,xlf,ncu,nvx,nkl,cev

These are the options: California, which from first hand experience I can tell you throws one Hell of a riot, will go Greece-like with guns blazing in the streets again, and/or President Sir-Spend-A-Lot will write them blank checks in his unstoppable mission to completely destroy the American Economy into a debt death spiral. And sure as the sun rises in the East, his personal media ****** will praise the "Genius" for avoiding another catastrophe.

Oh fun times indeed.

I read the brief. Looks like we can no longer "wish" some of these problems away. Or, at least California can't (but, when the likely scenario of protests occurs, it then truly will become all of our problem; and California isn't going to be alone either, as other states will be following in their footsteps).

As an aside, I've always liked those TechTicker guys in the video on the left. They generally make a lot of sense, with good perspectives.

Bottom line? Inflation will be coming our way if we print ourselves out of this mess, which surely we will. Maybe now some of those "doom and gloom" forecasts will begin to take shape. I think so, but who knows when.

cf

 

[cfdavid]

Here's some more details on California's plan from Bloomberg... I don't think the bold is going to go over so hot....

Schwarzenegger Preps ‘Terrible Cuts’ to Close Deficit (Update1)
Share Business ExchangeTwitterFacebook| Email | Print | A A A By Michael B. Marois and William Selway

May 11 (Bloomberg) -- California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will seek “terrible cuts” to eliminate an $18.6 billion budget deficit facing the most-populous U.S. state through June 2011, his spokesman said.

Schwarzenegger, 62, who will introduce his revised budget plans on May 14, has said he won’t seek tax increases to bolster California’s finances. The Republican’s forecast for the budget gap may rise after revenue fell short of his targets last month.

“We can’t get through this deficit without very terrible cuts,” Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear told reporters in Sacramento. “We don’t believe that raising taxes right now is the right thing to do.”

California’s revenue in April, when income-tax payments are due, trailed the governor’s estimates by $3.6 billion, or 26 percent. The gap wiped out gains from the previous four months, leaving collections $1.3 billion behind projections for the budget year that ends in June.

Schwarzenegger’s newest plan will revise the proposals introduced in January to account for the tax-collection shortages. In January, the governor said California may have to eliminate entire welfare programs, including the main one that provides cash and job assistance to families below the poverty line, without an influx of cash from the federal government.

Since then, the Democrat-controlled Legislature has made few strides toward closing the budget hole. Legislation adopted during the emergency session ordered by Schwarzenegger knocked about $1.4 billion from the deficit.

Tax Measures

Democrats this week introduced a package of bills that would raise as much as $2.9 billion annually by imposing a 10 percent severance tax on oil production in the state, repealing corporate-tax breaks approved last year to spur job growth and assessing commercial property taxes differently.

Schwarzenegger is girding for his final fight over California’s budget before leaving office in January. Over the last two years, he and lawmakers have had difficulty redrawing the budget fast enough to make up for revenue lost amid rising unemployment.

By the beginning of 2010, Schwarzenegger and the lawmakers had closed a $60 billion deficit partly by slashing spending on schools, temporarily raising taxes and borrowing from local governments.

The fiscal strains have left California with the lowest credit rating among U.S. states. A taxable California bond maturing in 2039 traded for a yield of 7.08 percent today, up from an average of 6.87 percent on May 6, according to Municipal Security Rulemaking Board data.

To contact the reporter on this story: William Selway in San Francisco at [email protected]; Michael Marois in Sacramento at [email protected].

Last Updated: May 11, 2010 15:44 EDT

 

[Jet915]

Being born and raised in California, I'm not surprised by this. Hopefully deep cuts will be made instead of the Messiah bailing them out. Once I got the chance, I changed my state of residence to FL so California could no longer waste my tax money.

 

[docelh]

This country is fundamentally corrupt.

 

[BLADEMDA]

This country is fundamentally corrupt.

Hence the run-up in Precious Metals. What would you rather be paid with in the future? Euros, dollars or gold?

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[BLADEMDA]

Gold reflects Geo-Political risk and Currency devaluation as well as future inflation. Not until we get another Reagan will you see the gold bubble burst.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider's Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice.

He has produced a March 01, 2009 article:

a banana republic by 2012?
Change for the Worse

"President Obama has presented the most irresponsible budget in US history. His fiscal year 2010 budget projects federal spending of $3.5 trillion and a federal deficit of $1.75 trillion. In other words, 50 percent of the government’s budget consists of red ink.

...

The bald fact is that the US government is going to have to borrow--or print--half of the money it intends to spend in Obama’s first budget. This fact has fallen through the cracks as New York Times headlines proclaim "A Bold Plan Sweeps Away Reagan Ideas." It certainly does sweep away Reagan ideas. No Reagan budget ever presumed that the federal government could borrow half of its annual expenditures. Indeed, Obama’s budget deficit for 2010 alone exceeds the totality of "Reagan Deficits" for Reagan’s two terms of office.

As presidential budgets are marketing devices rather than financial statements, they are imbued with optimistic assumptions. Obama’s budget is based on optimistic assumptions about the extent of decline in GDP. A more realistic projection of GDP decline would reveal that Obama’s budget is the first since World War II in which more than half of the government’s expenditures must be financed by red ink. I suspect that the red ink component of the FY 2010 budget will surpass World War II budgets.

 

[pgg]

Not until we get another Reagan will you see the gold bubble burst.

You mean the guy who can be fairly credited with making deficit spending the American way of life? 😉

Reagan did a lot of things right but we need someone better.

 

[GoodmanBrown]

You mean the guy who can be fairly credited with making deficit spending the American way of life? 😉

Reagan did a lot of things right but we need someone better.

Maybe another Clinton?

 

[cfdavid]

You mean the guy who can be fairly credited with making deficit spending the American way of life? 😉

Reagan did a lot of things right but we need someone better.

Pgg, I agree that we should be able to do better than point to Reagan's economic policies as our gold standard.

That being said, Paul Craig Roberts is a great guy to listen to, and is still very active in discussions regarding the economics of our country. Good reference Blade.

cf

 

[Narcotized]

Hence the run-up in Precious Metals. What would you rather be paid with in the future? Euros, dollars or gold?

Exactly right. No earthly reason why devalued printed money should go UP in value versus hard fixed assets. It's a mathematical no-brainer.

 

[Narcotized]

Not until we get another Reagan will you see the gold bubble burst.

Myth Number 1- Reagan was fiscal conservative.

Fact- Reagan exploded the government deficits and laid the groundwork towards ruin.

 

[Narcotized]

Maybe another Clinton?

Myth Number 2- Clinton got government spending under control.

Fact- Clinton raised spending like everyone else. He rode a dotcom bubble of huge revenues that never should have been. The ponzi bubble began collapsing before he left office leaving the massive spending without the revenues to support it.

 

[Narcotized]

"President Obama has presented the most irresponsible budget in US history. His fiscal year 2010 budget projects federal spending of $3.5 trillion and a federal deficit of $1.75 trillion. In other words, 50 percent of the government's budget consists of red ink.

Myth Number 3- Obama is a Genius that saved us!!!!!!!

Fact- Man, that dude is so mathematically incompetent I don't even know where to begin. I was ridiculed by friends and foes alike for calling him corrupt, not too bright, and leading us to destruction by taking the easy way out of borrowing more money that we can't afford. Looks like I was dead on right on every level of that assessment.

Look at the Obama spike on the right of the previous chart regarding government spending. Can you be anymore clueless and irresponsible?? Right now easily on track for being the worst president ever. Pretty amazing accomplishment considering who he replaced.

 

[docelh]

Hence the run-up in Precious Metals. What would you rather be paid with in the future? Euros, dollars or gold?

You know what? It really doesn't matter. Should the dollar fail, they'll come up with some new fiat standard and re-fix the level of gold to that.

CBO upped their costs of the health care bill by $115 Billion, after it passed
As if no one saw this coming.

Obama clearly rolled over the CBO to pass his socialist bill. Funny how the SEC finally charged the Goldman racket the week the Senate was debating "financial reform". No correlation?

It's a corrupt world; by definition, we all lose.

 

[GoodmanBrown]

Myth Number 2- Clinton got government spending under control.

Fact- Clinton raised spending like everyone else. He rode a dotcom bubble of huge revenues that never should have been. The ponzi bubble began collapsing before he left office leaving the massive spending without the revenues to support it.

Clinton raised spending, but he raised it slower than inflation (I'm estimating this from your own graph.). So, his spending increases were really quite reasonable. Further, if you look at discretionary spending, it actually dropped over his 8 years in office. His tax revenue increases also coincided with his 1993 tax increase. For which Democrats lost control of Congress.

It's true that Clinton benefited from the dotcom bubble and that it was popping by the time he was leaving office. Despite that I still think that Clinton was the most fiscally responsible president of the last half dozen.

 

[docelh]

Would Clinton have pursued the same course with Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress? Unlikely.

He probably would have pulled off a Bushie or a Barry Obama.

 

[GoodmanBrown]

Would Clinton have pursued the same course with Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress? Unlikely.

He probably would have pulled off a Bushie or a Barry Obama.

He had Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, dude. In 1992, Democrats won 56 seats in the Senate and 258 in the House of Representatives. With that majority, Bill Clinton passed a tax increase in 1993 which helped lead to balance federal budgets for most of his presidency.

In 1994, the American people voted Republicans into the Senate and House. That's the kind of thanks you get for trying to be fiscally responsible in the U.S.

 

[docelh]

Yeah, you're right on the tax increase. I guess I was referring to the spending cuts he did after 1994.

 

[GoodmanBrown]

Yeah, you're right on the tax increase. I guess I was referring to the spending cuts he did after 1994.

Fair enough. I don't think Clinton was the second coming or anything (though I think my dad may. 😛). But yeah, just in looking over the graph that I posted and the one that Narc posted, it seems like he had his head on somewhat straighter than most of our Commanders in Chief of late.

 

[GoLytely]

Dude, you're all thinking way too hard about this.

And for those of you who are surprised at our current situation, think a second about who Obama actually is. He's the most radical, most inexperienced and untested president the country has ever had. He got himself elected by brainwashing masses of college students and telling minority populations that he'd give them free ****.

I've been laughing hard for about 11 months now. This will almost certainly serve to get a hard fiscal conservative elected in 2012, along with unseating every financially illiterate communist in the house and senate, and with any luck we'll have another Reagan era to patch things up. If not, I'll just keep on laughing....

 

[pgg]

This will almost certainly serve to get a hard fiscal conservative elected in 2012

Who?

 

[Narcotized]

It's true that Clinton benefited from the dotcom bubble and that it was popping by the time he was leaving office. Despite that I still think that Clinton was the most fiscally responsible president of the last half dozen.

Ok, I'll give you that Clinton was the most fiscal responsible of that group, but it's like winning the skinniest kid award at Fat Camp; not very impressive in the way of competition.

Clinton governed over the late 90's, the most prosperous time in the history of the planet. I was working, single, and loving life. It was our Roaring 20's. Everyone belonged to $120 a month health clubs. Night Clubs were packed. Taxi drivers took a weekend course and became expert financial planners. Your friends sat around their house in underwear daytrading and thought they were stock experts as the Nasdaq went from 2000 to 3000 to 4000 to 5000. Handymen began flipping houses and thought they were real estate experts. You couldn't miss.

The fact is the differences in spending and tax rates those years were rather minor compared to other years, hardly explaining the monster spike on your deficit/surplus chart that not so ironically shoots to the moon and crashes just like the Nasdaq chart from the same time period. That period was one big mania of false wealth that was going to crash hard, and Democratic Clinton and Republican Congress want way too much credit for surpluses that mostly existed just for being in the right place at the right time. Even W. Bush and Obama would have looked like wizkids presiding in the later 90's.

 

[Narcotized]

Maybe another Clinton?

Definitely Not Another Obama:

 

[BLADEMDA]

You mean the guy who can be fairly credited with making deficit spending the American way of life? 😉

Reagan did a lot of things right but we need someone better.

In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden.

 

[BLADEMDA]

The Laffer curve, with "Tax Rate (%)" on the x-axis, and "Government Revenue" on the y-axis.

 

[GoodmanBrown]

Ok, I'll give you that Clinton was the most fiscal responsible of that group, but it's like winning the skinniest kid award at Fat Camp; not very impressive in the way of competition.

Clinton governed over the late 90's, the most prosperous time in the history of the planet. I was working, single, and loving life. It was our Roaring 20's. Everyone belonged to $120 a month health clubs. Night Clubs were packed. Taxi drivers took a weekend course and became expert financial planners. Your friends sat around their house in underwear daytrading and thought they were stock experts as the Nasdaq went from 2000 to 3000 to 4000 to 5000. Handymen began flipping houses and thought they were real estate experts. You couldn't miss.

The fact is the differences in spending and tax rates those years were rather minor compared to other years, hardly explaining the monster spike on your deficit/surplus chart that not so ironically shoots to the moon and crashes just like the Nasdaq chart from the same time period. That period was one big mania of false wealth that was going to crash hard, and Democratic Clinton and Republican Congress want way too much credit for surpluses that mostly existed just for being in the right place at the right time. Even W. Bush and Obama would have looked like wizkids presiding in the later 90's.

Won't argue with you there.

Re: The Laffer curve, but what's t*? We could argue about that all day.

Who?

I wonder about the future of Rand Paul. I read an interesting bio on him on Salon, and it painted him as the man who may benefit the most from the Tea Party movement. A man with a lot of his dad's ideas, but wrapped in a much more politically savvy package. Sounds like he's harnessing a lot of grassroots support a la Obama.

He's running for Senate in Kentucky. Polls show him absolutely crushing his Republican primary opponent and leading in the general election as well. Still learning about the Tea Party movement and "the Pauls" ideas, but I can say with confidence right now that I feel a lot better about him becoming president than Sarah Palin...

 

[cfdavid]

Won't argue with you there.

Re: The Laffer curve, but what's t*? We could argue about that all day.



I wonder about the future of Rand Paul. I read an interesting bio on him on Salon, and it painted him as the man who may benefit the most from the Tea Party movement. A man with a lot of his dad's ideas, but wrapped in a much more politically savvy package. Sounds like he's harnessing a lot of grassroots support a la Obama.

He's running for Senate in Kentucky. Polls show him absolutely crushing his Republican primary opponent and leading in the general election as well. Still learning about the Tea Party movement and "the Pauls" ideas, but I can say with confidence right now that I feel a lot better about him becoming president than Sarah Palin...

Didn't you know, the Tea Party is "racist" because it's comprised primarily of "white people".....

Paradoxically, the principles of the Tea Party movement, and what Ron/Rand Paul (with increasing company) benefit the "little guy" in an environment of big government and dependency.

So, the best thing for any minority community to do would be to jump onto the Tea Party bandwagon ASAP, and not allow the media to alienate them from doing so, with their baseless accussations of racist undertones...... But, the big government status quo has done a great job in creating the kind of dependency that, perhaps, prohibits this from happening. I guess people are just o.k. with a bit of hush money that keeps them barely above the poverty line....... Wow.

cf

 

[Narcotized]

I wonder about the future of Rand Paul. I read an interesting bio on him on Salon, and it painted him as the man who may benefit the most from the Tea Party movement. A man with a lot of his dad's ideas, but wrapped in a much more politically savvy package. Sounds like he's harnessing a lot of grassroots support a la Obama.

I don't know much about Rand, but Ron Paul I can say without a doubt has a better understanding of economics than every other politician in DC (unfortunately again, that might only make him the skinniest kid at fat camp; but Ron Paul really is a bright guy that understands economics while the rest have absolutely no clue).

Palin might occasionally say the right thing, but the idea of her being President is ridiculous. You Betcha!, on that one. I would put her at the level of PTA President or maybe head of your homeowner's association, and she might do an outstanding job. Probably make a great neighbor.

 

[Narcotized]

You know what? It really doesn't matter. Should the dollar fail, they'll come up with some new fiat standard and re-fix the level of gold to that.

Then actually it really does matter. Should the dollar fail and they refix the level of gold to a new fiat standard, you will be able to cash your gold in while your failed dollars will make nice crap papers for your puppy.

 

[GoodmanBrown]

I don't know much about Rand, but Ron Paul I can say without a doubt has a better understanding of economics than every other politician in DC (unfortunately again, that might only make him the skinniest kid at fat camp; but Ron Paul really is a bright guy that understands economics while the rest have absolutely no clue).

Palin might occasionally say the right thing, but the idea of her being President is ridiculous. You Betcha!, on that one. I would put her at the level of PTA President or maybe head of your homeowner's association, and she might do an outstanding job. Probably make a great neighbor.

Narc, you may be pleased to know that I'm taking your advice and reading Crash Proof 2.0 (this maybe was cf's advice, don't remember). Additionally, I'm doing it while on vacation in Texas of all places. Thought that might warm your heart (as much as a random, anonymous Internet poster can). 😉

 

[cfdavid]

Narc, you may be pleased to know that I'm taking your advice and reading Crash Proof 2.0 (this maybe was cf's advice, don't remember). Additionally, I'm doing it while on vacation in Texas of all places. Thought that might warm your heart (as much as a random, anonymous Internet poster can). 😉

Great choice. You won't regret it, and it's a fun read.

One thing to keep in mind is that Schiff tends to be more of an idealist, than, say, Marc Faber.

Schiff argues about what SHOULD be. He does offer real time solutions to what he views as the reality on the ground, so to speak, but he also does get into how things need to change, which is where some of his ideology shines through.

Faber is also at odds with the current Western system of economics, but in his investment advice, he's a strict puritan with respect to today's global realities. He does a better job, IMHO, than Schiff at separating ideology from pragmatism. Just my take on it. Perhaps others may disagree.

cf

 

[GoodmanBrown]

Great choice. You won't regret it, and it's a fun read.

One thing to keep in mind is that Schiff tends to be more of an idealist, than, say, Marc Faber.

Schiff argues about what SHOULD be. He does offer real time solutions to what he views as the reality on the ground, so to speak, but he also does get into how things need to change, which is where some of his ideology shines through.

Faber is also at odds with the current Western system of economics, but in his investment advice, he's a strict puritan with respect to today's global realities. He does a better job, IMHO, than Schiff at separating ideology from pragmatism. Just my take on it. Perhaps others may disagree.

cf

Do you have a book recommendation for Faber? I know you've recommend a podcast or two of him, right?

 

[Narcotized]

Narc, you may be pleased to know that I'm taking your advice and reading Crash Proof 2.0 (this maybe was cf's advice, don't remember). Additionally, I'm doing it while on vacation in Texas of all places. Thought that might warm your heart (as much as a random, anonymous Internet poster can). 😉

2 small weaknesses about Schiff and his book. As you get further into the book, there are a few large sections that are a sales pitch for his company. What he says about the US I have studied and know he's correct. What he says about Europe (his company is EUROpacific, so there is going to be some bias), I don't vouch for. I haven't spent time studying them, but I know their monetary system is heading down the crapper with Obama type debt-shall-set-you-free fundamentals.

The other knock is Schiff is not much of a technicalist. Overwhelmingly, daily moves are mostly technically driven, but Schiff always uses small meaningless moves to prove his points, such as, "Gold was up 10 today because the dollar is crap." OK, when gold is down 10 tomorrow, does that mean the dollar is whole again? Of course not. Just a couple of minor things to consider; otherwise Schiff is as sound as it gets with knowing the American economy and what a joke it is.

 

[Narcotized]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw&feature=related

A classic youtube that exploded Schiff on the map. Not just right in his predictions, but exact details of what was going to happen. "That's not real wealth. When you see the stock market come down and the real estate bubble burst, all that phoney wealth is going to evaporate, and all that's going to be left is all the debt accumulated to foreigners." That's as perfect as it gets.

Someone here mentioned Laffer. His credibility gets crushed in this video. Ben Stein, too. And look for the guys laughing on air when Schiff explains the real estate party is going to end hard. Peter Schiff is running for Senate in CT and has only 9% of the primary vote in the last poll. That's a sad reflection of how strong the big government Koolaide is. This guy is the Stoelting of Economics, yet far more people believe in the Obamanomic Fairytale than the basic principles spoken by Schiff.